« Breaking news: Air Force, Navy disagree | Main | Ewok Army »

April 09, 2007



They could try using gas cooled, pebble bed reactor. If they use helium for the coolent that would remove both steam legs of the reactor because that can be routed directly through the turbines. Adams Atmic Engines has some interesting ideas. http://www.atomicengines.com/


Has anyone thought about the consequences of naval nuclear ships in combat, getting sunk or damaged ?

The smaller CG(X) may be involved in operations that expose it to damage or sinking much more so than a carrier.

As nuclear propulsion spreads thought out a fleet, the consequences of the sinking or damage of these ships, may outweigh the consequences winning or losing of a battle.


Peter's got a point. The US hasn't put nuclear propulsion in a surface ship smaller than a carrier in forty years. We seem to have definitely taken a step back from that. One wonders if the accident on the Forrestal, and the Belknap getting clipped had something to do with that.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Current Issue

Blog powered by Typepad

Ares Photos

  • Riot 1
    Check out exclusive photos from Defense Technology International for a preview of upcoming stories, including: * Australian Army equips for stability ops * Army upgrades paratroopers * New A-10s!